Search for: "United States v. Mark"
Results 6121 - 6140
of 10,394
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Sep 2013, 6:30 am
Dorpan, S.L. v. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 1:57 pm
While several of Kennedy’s tendencies have been discussed in the literature—such as viewing Lawrence in terms of “liberty” over “privacy,” or his preference for protecting human dignity, or his strong belief in federalism —this article, written in light of Kennedy’s crowning achievement, United States v. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 5:53 am
Your Lawfare correspondent returns to Fort Meade to watch, via CCTV, another week-long set of hearings in the military commission case United States v. [read post]
15 Sep 2013, 9:00 pm
” Subsequently, in fact, the Court adopted this broader view eight years later in Moore v. [read post]
15 Sep 2013, 7:23 pm
As we meet for these pretrial proceedings in United States v. [read post]
14 Sep 2013, 11:28 am
Napue v People of State of Illinois, 360 US 264; Pyle v State of Kansas, 317 US 213; cf. [read post]
13 Sep 2013, 1:18 pm
Groeneveld Transport Efficiency, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Sep 2013, 8:00 am
Steak n Shake asserts that the Steak n Shake trademarks, and the products and services offered in association with those marks, have been extensively promoted throughout the United States for many years. [read post]
12 Sep 2013, 5:18 pm
If you hear that an eye-witness is about to testify at trial and there has been no § 710.30 notice, but there was an identification procedure, move to preclude the testimony on § 710.30 grounds, as a violation of your client’s right to due process as protected by the New York State and United States constitutions, and on relevance grounds, because if the observation didn’t relate to your client, the testimony is not relevant. [read post]
12 Sep 2013, 1:01 pm
Additionally, as a practical matter, some service providers already require a search warrant before disclosing stored content to law enforcement based on the Sixth Circuit’s 2010 decision in United States v. [read post]
11 Sep 2013, 9:55 am
Due to shipping considerations, only United States addresses, please. [read post]
11 Sep 2013, 4:42 am
Hovenkamp ("[P]otential [patent] defendants can do better by forming a litigation cost-sharing agreement: a contractual agreement that divides a member's defense costs among the group when the plaintiff is a PAE, and which requires members to litigate predatory claims to judgment.")The Failed Promise of User Fees: Empirical Evidence from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, by Michael Frakes & Melissa F. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 9:31 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 8:00 am
In 2011, the United States Supreme Court vacated that decision and ordered the Ninth Circuit to reconsider it in light of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 8:00 am
You’ve likely heard: in a bid to avert action by the United States, Russia has proposed that Syria abandon its chemical weapons stockpiles. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 6:03 am
§ 105: “Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government . . . . [read post]
9 Sep 2013, 9:11 pm
In United States v. [read post]
8 Sep 2013, 11:00 am
But jurisdictional objections are another matter, as the United States explains in its opposition brief: 1. [read post]
8 Sep 2013, 8:28 am
United States v. [read post]
6 Sep 2013, 10:28 am
Under the Lanham Act, a federal law, the holder of a mark may ask the United States Patent and Trademark Office to register the mark on the principal register. [read post]
